It's Your Team

kenneycb · Mar 22, 2015

I'd have to put time in to give a thoughtful answer on the future they still have a halfway decent shot at the playoffs so doing the first option would send an absolutely horrendous message to the current players, any potential FAs and the fanbase. Stupidest thing they could do at this specific moment.

behindthepen · Mar 23, 2015

The toughest thing right now is to figure out what kind of team this is. One of my big struggles with the organizational moves over the last couple of years is the lack of consistency, the lack of a theme. That goes for trades, signings and development. This isn't the physical team of 2011. Some guys are gone, some have softened their game as they've aged. Maybe the current identity is supposed to be "play good defense"? But the execution is failing? The team is certainly not built to be offensive.

Once you've defined what kind of team this is supposed to be, I think a lot of the next decisions are easier. Let's say we stick with "play good defense" theme. We need a little more depth on the blue line, but I think you have to believe Chara and Seids will be better next year. We need to figure out if Krug can play top 4 minutes, and that dictates how much of a reach you need there.

For the forwards, I think it's okay to have a pure scoring line. And Chris Kelly doesn't belong on that line. So for this season, I say screw it, move Kelly to Bergy's line. We're stuck with Smith for now, so move him to Soderberg's line. Find somebody in Providence to play some 4th line minutes and shelve Campbell. Along the way, hopefully we find out what the best roles are for Eriksson and Spooner and Pasta.

In the offseason, look for a D man. See if someone will overpay for Lucic. I think the core stays intact, because frankly we don't have many options. I think you can win with Claude, but there better be a team identity developed with the additions and subtractions.

Steve Dillard · Mar 23, 2015

The biggest thing they need to do is significantly oversteer from the mantra that has driven the team since Chiarelli took over.
The first thing we do is make sure I have autonomy from Cam. There is an organizational love of grit and toughness over skill, and some of that comes from Cam (though I get the sense he is not a complete old school guy in that regard.) Firing Claude gets another aspect of the grit over skill philosophy.
They inherited a core of skill players (Kessel, Krejic, Wheeler), with a decent blend of toughness (Lucic). Chiarelli's first moves were great, locking up Chara but also a skill guys, Savard and Ryder.
Unfortunately, as they worked to steer the boat toward a tougher image, they shed the skill, Kessel, Wheeler, Savard and Ryder, in favor of a lot of complementary players. They had no choice but to take Seguin, another skill guy, but quickly reversed that "mistake" by getting more grit for him.

It is a balance, and in trying to make a skilled team tougher, they reached a good blend in 2011, but then thought that "adding git" was what made them succesful, so rather than keep that blend, they just ditched most of their skill guys in favor of the guys who they added to the mix.

They are now far too extreme in grit.
Adding grit is always the easier move to balance a team. Adding skill to move back toward the right blend is the hard part because few GMs actually trade skill.

It's going to be a hard process, and drafting is not going to get you out of this in the short term. (Though Pasternak helps.) The better approach is to create salary space to get a skilled free agent.

As for drafts, I would focus on skill. You can always pick up the 3rd line guys through other means. Shoot for skills when drafting, because those guys will be the core. I don't think their drafting is as strong an indicator of the "grit" approach, because clearly Spooner, Khoklovech, and even before them, Colbourne are more finesse guys than grit (Caron being the counterpoint to this). However, drafting guys like Camara, Ferlin, Cody Payne, Lane McDermott, Tyler Randell, Mitch Dempsey and Willy Sherman isn't going to get you a surprise 3rd rounder like Marchand who becomes a top 2 liner.

jk333 · Mar 23, 2015

Looking at the Bruins identity is interesting. This year Campbell leads the team in fights with five. McQuaid and Lucic also fight but less. There isn't another Bruin with more than 2 fights and Krug(!) is tied for 4th on the team in fighting majors. Unfortunately, as behindthepen says, their intimidating players have left and/or become less physical. (Lucic and McQuaid less intimidating, while Iginla, Thornton and Boychuk are gone)

When Iginla left, the Bruins lost a skilled, physical winger. Boychuk was replaced by dmen who were less physical and less skilled. Thornton was replaced by Gagne in a move that predictably didn't help their physicality and surprisingly didn't help their skill either. Those are three spots that can be improved next year.

The defense was supposed to be one of the best in the league. But with Boychuk gone, Chara, McQuaid and Seidenberg have slipped or been injured. The young defensemen - Krug and Hamilton, are better offensively than defensively. Both Morrow and Warsofsky are prospects that look similar. I'd look to move McQuaid with a pick and bring back a more reliable defensemen. On the forwards at least one of Lucic or Eriksson need to be moved but they need to bring in a goal scorer. I would make a big offer for Hall but don't see the Oilers moving him.

Edit: in response to Steve Dilliard - They may be gritty but they're not intimidating or even very physical. Certainly the defense is a far cry from how physical they were 2 - 3 years ago. Many of the new players are an attempt to play a faster more skilled game. Examples of this include Spooner, Pastrnak, Griffith, Krug, and Hamilton. I agree that players like Campbell and Paille are a major part of the problem.

cshea · Mar 23, 2015

I'm of the opinion that Chiarelli should not lose his job if they miss, but I guess that's another discussion. I'll have a more thought out long term plan up later, but as far as the draft goes, I'd keep things starus quo for now. They fired Wayne Smith and elevated Gretzky in August of 2013, so the 2014 draft was Gretzky's first draft with complete control. The, admittedly very early, return on the 2014 class (David Pastrnak, Ryan Donato, Danton Heinen and Anders Bjork) is very promising. Pastrnak has been an NHL contributed since joining the club. Donato is several years away so not much on him yet. Heinen is at 1.18 points per game, leading U. Denver in scoring. 2nd in the country in freshman scoring behind only Jack Eichel. Bjork is at Notre Dame and played for the U.S. at the WJC's. I think there is enough promise in that draft to give Gretzky another crack at it.

ivanvamp · Mar 23, 2015

I don't know as much about hockey as most of you guys here, but what astounds me is this: the Bruins, for the past 5 years or so, have been one of the very best teams in the NHL, year-in and year-out. One Cup, one almost Cup, a dominant regular season last year, etc.

And then…boom. They absolutely fell off a cliff this year. Some horrifying facts:

- Lack of scoring punch. Last year, they were 3rd in the NHL in scoring at 3.15 goals per game (on 31.9 shots). This year they're 19th at 2.60 goals per game (on 30.8 shots). Last year they had two guys in the top 16 in goals (Iginla and Bergeron). This year their top goal scorer (Marchand) is tied for 43rd in goals, with their #2 goal scorer (Bergeron) tied for 52nd.

- Defensively, they've slipped too. Part of this is Rask. Part of it is the ineffective defensemen in front of him. But last year they were 2nd in the NHL allowing 2.09 goals per game (on 29.1 shots). This year they're 10th, allowing 2.48 goals per game (on 29.8 shots).

So combined, they're scoring 0.55 goals less, and giving up 0.39 goals more. That's nearly a full goal swing per game - a very easy formula for having a much worse season.

The question is why. It's probably a combination of several things. To me some factors are:

- Age. Chara, Seidenberg, etc. Just getting older in some key areas.

- Injuries. It's the NHL and these guys are the toughest athletes around, and everyone deals with injuries. But the Bruins have lost a lot of ice time from some of their key guys. When everything else is struggling, this simply doesn't help.

- Lesser talent. They've given up some quality guys (Seguin, Boychuck, etc.) and I'm not sure the replacements have the same talent level.

So I don't know how much of these factors come into play here. Maybe it's just a random, crappy season. It happens. Maybe this exact same group, with the kids getting another year of experience, and some better health, will turn this thing around. I don't know. I don't know enough to know if player A should be on the same line as player B instead of player C.

My gut tells me that they should absolutely fight to be in the playoffs this year, but in the offseason try to move some of the more expensive contracts and try to get younger and more skilled. But the B's have so many NTC guys that I don't know how this is easily done.

theapportioner · Mar 23, 2015

How much of the problem is scheme and strategy, though? We've seen players like Seguin and Boychuk up their points totals considerably after leaving the Bruins. Conversely, people Eriksson has contributed far less, on a points basis, than he did in Dallas.

I'm sure personnel is part of the problem, with the aging/injured defensive stalwarts in Chara and Seidenberg, and inconsistent play from many of the players on offense. But maybe the Bruins aren't playing the right kind of game, or perhaps they were with the personnel they had in 2011, but not today, for a variety of reasons.

lexrageorge · Mar 23, 2015

Steve Dillard said:
Unfortunately, as they worked to steer the boat toward a tougher image, they shed the skill, Kessel, Wheeler, Savard and Ryder, in favor of a lot of complementary players. They had no choice but to take Seguin, another skill guy, but quickly reversed that "mistake" by getting more grit for him.

I need to quibble with this sentence. First, Savard was "shed" by Matt Cooke, not by Chiarelli nor Neely. Wheeler was traded at the deadline for a much needed Peverley, who played a role in their winning the Cup that season. And Wheeler's future trajectory at that point was by no means certain. Yes he had skill, but many skill players never take the next step to become true first line (or even 2nd line) players. And this board was nearly unanimous in declaring Ryder's contract with Dallas as being an overpay. Kessel was caught is a salary cap crunch, and the Bruins valued Krejci more highly (as did a number of scouts and NHL Network talking heads, for that matter).

Back on point: first, I ardently believe that firing Chiarelli fixes nothing, and could very well result in a far worse GM/coach combination taking over. Yeah, it sucks to miss the playoffs, but at some point every team is going to go through a down year as core players age, injuries mount, younger players take longer than expected to develop, and departed players shine elsewhere. If anything, I'm guessing Julien is gone before Chiarelli; again, that doesn't solve anything, but at least there are always good replacements available in June.

However, if I was GM, I would take break the team down in the following players:

Veteran core players that I would not trade: Bergeron, Krejci, and probably Rask (seen enough of the backups)

Veteran players that are not worth trading (either due to NMC's, injuries, etc.): Chara

Veteran players that can only be traded if team is willing to take bad contract: Seidenberg (likely stays for a while)

Young players that absolutely must be retained: Hamilton, Pastrnak, maybe Krug

Young players that I would like to see get more playing time: Spooner

UFA's to say goodbye to: Campbell, Paille

UFA's that are welcome back only if willing to take reasonable salary, but otherwise gone: McQuaid (likely back), Soderberg (likely gone), Bartkowski (maybe gets more playing time under a different coach)

Trade bait: Smith, Lucic, Ericksson, Marchand, Kelly, and all others.

Honestly, I would try to move Lucic, as his next contract is going to be unbearable for this team to swallow.

I would also tell Jacobs Jr. that this team is likely going to have to take a couple of steps back until the latest round of draft picks starts rounding into form and the team's cap situation improves, and I'd much rather have room under the cap to pay for Pastrnak's and Hamilton's next contracts than to run out and grab another Chris Kelly (or, worse, Simon Gagne) in the hopes of finishing 8th next season. If he cannot accept that, I don't take the job.

TSC · Mar 23, 2015

I don't understand the attachment here to Chiarelli.

Yes, the Bruins won a cup under him. But that Cup, like it or not - was luck more than anything else. The team that took the Hawks to game 6 was probably the team (in the timeline of the rebuild) you would have expected to make the Cup run. The team that did win did so on the back of a historic goal-tending effort, a couple of lucky bounces, and some players getting hot at the right time.

Look at the reactions of people here before game 7 of the Montreal series in 2011 - people THEN were ready to fire Chia and Julien. Thomas goes Dryden, Recchi, Bergeron, Horton, and Marchand become playoff heroes, and suddenly we're keeping that team together for 3+ years with NMC's for everyone.

I think when you look at his overall record - Chia has more often than not missed. And his misses have been significantly bigger than his hits. Combine that with some bad luck and you have the makings of this season. And the bleak perspective many here have.

I think the turning point - was valuing Claude's system over a player like Seguin. The Seguin trade was Chia putting faith that Claude could make a winner out of grit, defense, and a good goalie.

Unfortunately - I think he was wrong. I think the Bruins should have kept and built a core around Seguin, Marchand, Bergeron, Rask, etc, and fired Claude. Would it have been hard to do that in the off-season of a SCF appearance? Yes - but look no further than the Patriots to see why it's better to get rid of someone a year early, as opposed to a year too late.

I think Claude AND Chia need to go, and I think the Bruins need to realize that real talent (Seguin, Wheeler, Kessel,) is worth keeping. Grit can be acquired on the cheap.

RIFan · Mar 23, 2015

-This season. Keep driving towards the playoffs. I'd like to see Lindblad and Florek get some time on the 4th line as part of next years audition.
-The plan.

-The offseason. I think Bergy, Dougie, Pasta and Rask are the only untouchables. Chara isn't untouchable, but with his NMC and contract I doubt you could get close to equal value, so he stays. Marchand, Krejci, Krug, would require a team to blow you away to pry loose. I'd move Ericksson if I get fair value, but don't actively market him. (change of scenery for both players) I do everything possible to move Seidenberg including keeping a portion of the salary. His contract is brutal given that it runs through 17-18. McQuaid & Bartkowski I offer 1 year make good contracts at close to his current rate. I love Lucic, but I make him available to bring back a roster player with top 6 potential and cap savings. Soderberg is a closer call. I think it's possible they could low ball him and get him accept. I think he values comfort in his surroundings over starting fresh somewhere else. If it will take more than 3.5, he's gone. I keep Kelly to center the kids on the 4th line. Campbell's next contract will be as a FO guy. Paille is gone. Koko, Smith and Subban are trade bait to bring back a top 6 winger. I look for value and short term contracts in FA, with the goal is to create more cap flexibility for 2016-17. I try to target a veteran D who will work in Claude's system. Svedberg will get tendered at a minimum raise with the understanding it's an open competition between him, Subban (if not moved), and Smith. Loser of the camp battle gets waived/ sent to AHL. Overall, I suck it up and look at 15-16 as a bridge year unless some pieces fall into my lap.

-The coaching staff. I stay the course with Claude. I do, however, look hard at the assistant coaches. What was lost with Geoff Ward? Has Sacco added anything?

-The draft/prospects. I think this had been addressed with the scouting department overhaul. Pastrnak, Heinen, Fitzgerald, and Arnesson all look like good picks at this point with Pastrnak and Heinen looking like steals at their draft position. I continue the emphasis on looking for skill over "grit" in the early rounds.

Smiling Joe Hesketh · Mar 23, 2015

ivanvamp said:
I don't know as much about hockey as most of you guys here, but what astounds me is this: the Bruins, for the past 5 years or so, have been one of the very best teams in the NHL, year-in and year-out. One Cup, one almost Cup, a dominant regular season last year, etc.

And then…boom. They absolutely fell off a cliff this year. Some horrifying facts:

- Lack of scoring punch. Last year, they were 3rd in the NHL in scoring at 3.15 goals per game (on 31.9 shots). This year they're 19th at 2.60 goals per game (on 30.8 shots). Last year they had two guys in the top 16 in goals (Iginla and Bergeron). This year their top goal scorer (Marchand) is tied for 43rd in goals, with their #2 goal scorer (Bergeron) tied for 52nd.

- Defensively, they've slipped too. Part of this is Rask. Part of it is the ineffective defensemen in front of him. But last year they were 2nd in the NHL allowing 2.09 goals per game (on 29.1 shots). This year they're 10th, allowing 2.48 goals per game (on 29.8 shots).

So combined, they're scoring 0.55 goals less, and giving up 0.39 goals more. That's nearly a full goal swing per game - a very easy formula for having a much worse season.

The question is why. It's probably a combination of several things. To me some factors are:

- Age. Chara, Seidenberg, etc. Just getting older in some key areas.

- Injuries. It's the NHL and these guys are the toughest athletes around, and everyone deals with injuries. But the Bruins have lost a lot of ice time from some of their key guys. When everything else is struggling, this simply doesn't help.

- Lesser talent. They've given up some quality guys (Seguin, Boychuck, etc.) and I'm not sure the replacements have the same talent level.

So I don't know how much of these factors come into play here. Maybe it's just a random, crappy season. It happens. Maybe this exact same group, with the kids getting another year of experience, and some better health, will turn this thing around. I don't know. I don't know enough to know if player A should be on the same line as player B instead of player C.

My gut tells me that they should absolutely fight to be in the playoffs this year, but in the offseason try to move some of the more expensive contracts and try to get younger and more skilled. But the B's have so many NTC guys that I don't know how this is easily done.

I think your take on the team this year is very fair.

They got old on the back line: we saw some of this in the playoffs last year, when the defense had no chance of competing with Montreal's speedy forwards. They got old back there in a big damn hurry, and it hurt them then and it's hurting them now. The Boychuk trade, while understandable due to cap reasons, has really really really hurt the team as well, not because he was a star, but because he was a top 4 defeseman that the team really couldn't afford to lose.

Lack of scoring punch is really simple to explain for me: they traded Seguin and lost Iginla to FA in consecutive years, and Krejci's missed a huge chunk of this season with injuries. That's an immense amount of scoring power taken away from the team over the past couple of years. Ericksson and Smith (the return for Seguin now that Fraser's gone) haven't scored enough to make up for their absence. Smith in particular has been a huge disappointment this year with his lack of development.

Rask is fine, he wasn't himself earlier this year but to my eyes he's the same excellent goalie he's always been. The defense in front of him has been much worse than in past years. The lack of a trusted backup has hurt him a bit as at times he's looked worn down, but overall he's been fine.

The drafts have not been good for Chia of late, the Bruins haven't gotten much from their drafts and that's a big problem.

I'm not sure I'd fire Chia and Claude if they miss the playoffs this year. Yes, I'd like to see Claude move a bit away from the defensive-first schemes he likes to play, but I don't think he has a problem giving young players a chance. I would like to see more allowances made to players whose primary skill is scoring, I do think the issues they had with Kessel kind of pointed to that as being something they're pretty inflexible about. And we've talked about Chia's love for grinders and his free disposition of Mo Movement Clauses, which haven't helped.

I would like to see overall team speed increase; they got blown off the ice by Montreal and looked old, slow, and helpless in that series. Montreal's not going away; in order to compete the Bruins are going to have to respond somehow. If that means that Lucic is gone after his contract is up....fine by me.

Scoops Bolling · Mar 23, 2015

TheShynessClinic said:
I don't understand the attachment here to Chiarelli.

Yes, the Bruins won a cup under him. But that Cup, like it or not - was luck more than anything else. The team that took the Hawks to game 6 was probably the team (in the timeline of the rebuild) you would have expected to make the Cup run. The team that did win did so on the back of a historic goal-tending effort, a couple of lucky bounces, and some players getting hot at the right time.

Look at the reactions of people here before game 7 of the Montreal series in 2011 - people THEN were ready to fire Chia and Julien. Thomas goes Dryden, Recchi, Bergeron, Horton, and Marchand become playoff heroes, and suddenly we're keeping that team together for 3+ years with NMC's for everyone.

I think when you look at his overall record - Chia has more often than not missed. And his misses have been significantly bigger than his hits. Combine that with some bad luck and you have the makings of this season. And the bleak perspective many here have.

Championships are always luck. You think the Kings have much more than luck to point to for their two wins? If the Hawks lose to the Red Wings in Game 7 in 2013, would it just be luck that they were able to win a couple years prior thanks to the fact those players hadn't been paid yet? But you have to be in position to get lucky, and Chiarelli has positioned the team well enough to get the championship twice, and put together a President's Trophy winner in a 3rd season that simply ran into the worst possible matchup.

As for Chia's record, I find it hilarious to talk about how he misses more than he hits...when you can look at 20+ other teams in the league that would take his overall record in a heartbeat. It's not like the team he took over was a juggernaut by any stretch of the imagination. People on this board seem to think the team should be able to be a perennial contender that holds onto every single good player without issue, as if there was no salary cap, and then turn around and act like the team has been garbage for the past half decade. It's short sighted at best and downright stupid at worst. Does this mean Chia gets an endless leash? Of course not. But using one injury marred season where the team is still on the bubble to clear house is the height of idiocy.

Chiarelli may not be a Top 3 GM in hockey. He is probably a Top 10 one. If you dump him, what are the chances the replacement is at that level, and that we don't very quickly rue the day we looked for greener pastures?

Smiling Joe Hesketh · Mar 23, 2015

Scoops Bolling said:
Championships are always luck. You think the Kings have much more than luck to point to for their two wins? If the Hawks lose to the Red Wings in Game 7 in 2013, would it just be luck that they were able to win a couple years prior thanks to the fact those players hadn't been paid yet? But you have to be in position to get lucky, and Chiarelli has positioned the team well enough to get the championship twice, and put together a President's Trophy winner in a 3rd season that simply ran into the worst possible matchup.

They're going to be seeing a ton of Montreal going forward, so if they can't figure out a way to match up against them then IMO that will indeed be a reason to fire Chia. Not only did they get beat in the playoffs last year, rendering that President's Trophy worthless, they got killed by them in the regular season this year.

I'm not saying I'd fire Chia now, but if they don't play better against Montreal next year then he's gone as far as I'm concerned. They got exposed last year as slow and decrepit and it was awful to witness. Chia has to find a way to counterpunch that.

Scoops Bolling · Mar 23, 2015

Yeah, I don't see that at all. If the Lightning beat Montreal in the playoffs, does that mean Montreal needs to blow itself up because they can't match up with the Lightning? You can't match up with everyone. Saying the Bruins need to change what they do just to match up with the Bruins is like saying the Canucks needed to blow themselves up to match up with the Bruins after they lost in 2011...oh wait, remind me how that worked out?

cshea · Mar 23, 2015

TheShynessClinic said:
I don't understand the attachment here to Chiarelli.

Yes, the Bruins won a cup under him. But that Cup, like it or not - was luck more than anything else. The team that took the Hawks to game 6 was probably the team (in the timeline of the rebuild) you would have expected to make the Cup run. The team that did win did so on the back of a historic goal-tending effort, a couple of lucky bounces, and some players getting hot at the right time..

This is ridiculous. A hot goalie, timely scoring and a few lucky bounces describes every Stanley Cup Champion basically ever.

For the fire Peter and Claude crowd, who are we replacing them with?

Smiling Joe Hesketh · Mar 23, 2015

Didn't the scheduling change for this year, with more in-division matchups? That's what I mean.

They need to get better to compete with Montreal. They were a million miles behind them this year.

Scoops Bolling · Mar 23, 2015

Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Didn't the scheduling change for this year, with more in-division matchups? That's what I mean.

They need to get better to compete with Montreal. They were a million miles behind them this year.

Yes, but again, the Lightning are in the same division too...does Montreal need to blow things up too in order to account for that single divisional foe?

Dummy Hoy · Mar 23, 2015

Altering your franchise to beat a single opponent (even if they're in your division) is foolish.

I think the best thing for this thread (a great thread, btw) would be to lock it until we know the outcome of this season. I bet people's opinions will change depending on the results of the next month.

lexrageorge · Mar 23, 2015

I think if this thread can stay reasonably focused on how to fix the team going forward, it's still worthwhile.

If it becomes an ongoing reassessment of the Blake Wheeler-for-Stanley Cup trade, then it's time to lock it.

teddykgb · Mar 23, 2015

Dummy Hoy said:
Altering your franchise to beat a single opponent (even if they're in your division) is foolish.

I think the best thing for this thread (a great thread, btw) would be to lock it until we know the outcome of this season. I bet people's opinions will change depending on the results of the next month.

I disagree. I think the thought experiment is 10000% more interesting right now because it highlights how hard these decisions are. With the benefit of hindsight and closure on the season, it's just a slightly different animal. If the Bruins wanted to move on from players, coaches, or GMs this offseason, they've almost got to be making that decision around now anyway.

The biggest problem I see with most of the proposals I've read so far is that they seem to amount to "keep our young promising players + Chara" and trade everyone else. I don't see us getting much for most of the players we'd be willing to move, so it's hard to imagine getting better through trades of players with what I think are established values like Marchand, Eriksson, etc. Let alone Soderberg or McQuaid, etc.

Given that the problems are the mix of talent level to cap hits, I think the team will have to entertain bigger moves than even just moving Lucic. I'd be wanting to explore teams who feel they are one piece away who might mortgage a little of the future for the present. Players like Chara might have value in that context, and I'm sure that some of the players we're not eager to trade would also have value in that context. It's sort of amazing to type, but I think we're going to have to be OK with trading the likes of Krejci or Rask to build for the future a little bit.

I'm hesitant to change the coach. I don't really see this season as his fault, there's no way to coach Chara and Seidenberg back into their younger selves or Krejci back to health. We as fans tend to interpret poor play as not trying hard enough, but I really don't feel the team has mailed it in this year so much as just completely lost talent and confidence. I also don't believe his system is outdated in the NHL, I'd hate to see us overreact to the Seguin thing and give up on the overall organizational philosophy toward tougher, 2 way players. I think they're more right than wrong there, and some of what's happened this season is that we're lacking too many of those types. The coach needs to show some flexibility with guys like Pastrnak and Spooner, but the skill problem for me is that we have too many guys who have "no skill" when compared to their peers. Maybe I'm a dinosaur here, but I still see Lucic as a very good player and the type of player we need more of, not less. There's still a chasm of difference between Lucic and Kelly, Soderberg, etc and we should be targeting guys who give us a definable style of play that we can execute, but they need to have some skill with the puck. I honestly don't have enough NHL knowledge to pick which players will be available who fit this bill, but I think it would be a mistake to try to reshape the team in the mold of Montreal or New York.

McDrew · Mar 23, 2015

First thing I'd do is tell Claude he's safe and tell Jacobs that he's an idiot for firing Chiarelli or anyone else in the front office and work to get everyone back.

This season has sucked for pretty much the same reason 2011 was awesome. This year has been a string of bad luck, 2011 was a series of fortunate events.

This year:
Our 1A defenseman and captain went down with a PCL tear, missed most of the first half of the season, and has not been the same.
Our 2A defensemam came back from an ACL and MCL tear and has lost a step
Our 3A defenseman dislocated his shoulder twice, leading to more Providence-level depth problems
Our 1A center has missed most of the season with multiple injuries.
The team was hamstrung by a ~$4M cap penalty. Again, the 2013-14 cup run does not happen without Iginla. The team went for it last year and paid the price this year. That 4M = Boychuck staying (extension or otherwise is another discussion).
The wing we traded for to help this season injured his wrist in practice, and might be ready for the end of the season (which won't matter).
Eriksson, Soderberg, Smith, and Lucic all severely underperformed.
The 4th line has been slightly better than 3 corpses, but not by much. Gagne just left the team.

None of any of that is on Chia except the extension, and there's no way he did that without fully making the owners aware of what he was doing and what the penalty was for.

Listen, this season has been a shitshow, but overreacting and throwing Chia/Claude out because of a severely unlucky year is about the stupidest thing you can do. This is equivalent of giving up on a diet after you don't lose 5 pounds in a day.

If we get rid of Claude, who are we replacing him with? In his 8 years with the Bruins, this will be the FIRST that they miss the playoffs. He has 2 first round losses, 3 2nd round losses, 1 finals loss, and 1 cup in 8 years.

Babcock, who everyone is clamoring to replace him, has 3 first round losses, 3 2nd round losses, a 3rd round loss, finals, loss and finals win in the same time period. Is Claude->Babcock really that much of an improvement?

If the B's come out of cap hell next year and perform like they are this year, then Claude and Chia should start getting worried. This year was bad, and we knew it would be going in, no matter how much we wanted to deny it.

The amount of pearl-clutching is getting ridiculous. The "I have no idea why this team has struggled and someone has to be to blame, so let's blame the people that are fire-able" is irresponsible laziness.

Next Season:
Lucic-Krecji-Pastrnak
Marchand-Bergeron-Wing
Eriksson-Soderberg-Smith
Talbot-Kelly-Connolly
Spooner

Chara-Hamilton (RFA signing)
Seidenberg-McQuaid ()
Krug-Miller
Rask
Goalie Backup

That's who they have under contract going into next year, with the BOLD as people who are not under contact next year and could be replaced with the cap room the Bruins will have (remember, they get 4M back of cap room next season to start on top of any increase in the salary cap.

Healthy Krecji + Contract Year Lucic + non-first-year-jitters Pastrnak = scary line.
Bergeron and Marchand will also be a great line. Here's where I think Chia should go look at a Zuccharello, Tlusty, Glencross, or Cole for a wing that can operate on the shut-down-the-other-teams-1st line and contribute 15-20 goals and 50ish points.

Soderberg is 6th on this team in points. If we can sign him to a cap friendly deal, I'd say go for it. Otherwise look to replace him in FA.

This team had a bad year. The philosophy has produced results, and unless this team comes out of the gate struggling like they are late this season, I don't see any legit reason for questioning Chia or Claude.

RedOctober3829 · Mar 23, 2015

Zuccarrello just signed a long-term deal with the Rangers so he's off the board.

A lot of points I wanted to make have already been addressed. If you look at the Eastern Conference, what is one thing in common among the top teams(NYR, Montreal, TB, Detroit, Pittsburgh, NY Islanders)? They are all faster than the Bruins. They have to address team speed in addition to fortifying the blue line.

Dummy Hoy · Mar 23, 2015

Well, if we're keeping this going...

I think Seidenberg has been playing a lot better the last month or so. He's still slower, but I think he's compensating for that a lot better. It doesn't help him when he's got to cover for his partner though.

As someone who has a fair amount of coaching experience, I do wonder if Claude needs to go. 8 years is a long time to hear the same voice, and if the team has been tuning him out (which none of us know one way or the other), then it may be best for him to move along. If he has the support of the team, I am willing to keep following his lead. I would like to see more speed though, even if it's at the expense of his grinders.

cshea · Mar 23, 2015

So here's my plan. It's independent of the result of this season. I don't think a playoff miss or deep run should lead to a massive change in direction.

Forwards: I'd let all of the UFA's go. Soderberg, Campbell, Paille. All are fungible and replaceable. They are going to be tight up against the cap again next year, no need to overpay for replaceable players. It sucks we won't get much of a look at Connolly this year, but let those 3 walk and we're left with something like:

Lucic - Krejci - Pastrnak
Marchand - Bergeron - Smith
Eriksson - Spooner - Connolly
Talbot - Kelly - XXX

4th line vacancy can be filled internally. Not much wrong with this group.

Defense:

This is where they need work. Lots of it. It was their downfall last year and it is what's holding them back this year. Chara's in decline, Seidenberg's in decline and McQuaid's not very good. Chara and Seidenberg are likely untradeablele unless we're taking a bad contract back. Given we're up against the cap already, I'd rather just hang on to them and hope for bounce backs. Chara can still be useful, but his minutes need to be managed and I'd take him off the power play. I'd jettison McQuaid, and probably look to trade Miller. McQuaid and Miller are redundant and the last thing the Bruins need is more stay-at-home defensemen. Hamilton and Krug are keepers. They need to figure out a way to get a mobile, top 4, preferably top 2 defensemen. These types of players don't grow on trees and don't become available very often. I'm not sure how to do it, but I'd make almost the entire roster, except for Bergeron, available for a top end, 2-way defensemen. I'd even consider our #1 pick this year, assuming they don't win the lottery. It is their biggest area of need and I truly think that's what is holding them back the most.

NHbeau · Mar 23, 2015

I honestly would feel bad taking this job. This team and system are an utter clusterfuck right now. I'd have fired Chiarelli roughly 30 seconds after asking me to renew Smith with a 2 year 3.4 mil contract. Honestly Julien needs to go unless you gut the roster because at this point it's pretty clear no one listens to a damn thing he says. Randy Carlyle and Paul Maclean are my first call's after that. If you're last name isn't Hamilton, Spooner, Bergeron, Rask or Pastrnak you're available. If you're over 27 and a UFA or RFA I'm probably letting you walk unless you're willing to play for a serious discount. I'd poach every good drafting office in the NHL for scouts etc. I would be after picks, and young talent. Defense, top 6 doesn't matter. So many holes to fill on this team any piece you get is one less you need to hunt for. After that pray you hit on draft picks, get cap space and hope you get the time from ownership to rebuild.

kenneycb · Mar 23, 2015

If people hate Clode now, I can only imagine how long the honeymoon with Carlyle would last. One week? Christ almighty.

NHbeau · Mar 23, 2015

I don't dislike Claude. Or his system. I think it work's even if he can be a bit stubborn with his gritty 4th line players at times. My point is that it's obvious from him having assistant's deliver pre game messages, to his comments after games about the team's lack of compete something needs to give. He won't bench the Paille's and Campbells on the roster. He only shuffles lines for a shift or two. Your choice as a GM is to either remove those players or to remove the coach. And since Chiarelli has handed out NMC and NTC to any and everyone one's hands are kind of tied. I don't blame Julien for playing the Campbell's and other flotsam on this roster, he's doing his best to win games. That's what coach's do. I blame Chiarelli for giving him those options and not forcing more development onto the 4th line. I put 90% of this teams problems on Chiarelli and his poor eye for talent and pretty awful contract's and the other 10% on the players and coach.

kenneycb · Mar 23, 2015

And my point is that Randy Carlyle is not who you should be seeking to replace him if you're looking for a change in coaching philosophy. If anything he'd play more of those guys.

lexrageorge · Mar 23, 2015

NHbeau said:
I don't dislike Claude. Or his system. I think it work's even if he can be a bit stubborn with his gritty 4th line players at times. My point is that it's obvious from him having assistant's deliver pre game messages, to his comments after games about the team's lack of compete something needs to give. He won't bench the Paille's and Campbells on the roster. He only shuffles lines for a shift or two. Your choice as a GM is to either remove those players or to remove the coach. And since Chiarelli has handed out NMC and NTC to any and everyone one's hands are kind of tied. I don't blame Julien for playing the Campbell's and other flotsam on this roster, he's doing his best to win games. That's what coach's do. I blame Chiarelli for giving him those options and not forcing more development onto the 4th line. I put 90% of this teams problems on Chiarelli and his poor eye for talent and pretty awful contract's and the other 10% on the players and coach.

Chiarelli did take a team that had nothing but Bergeron and roster fodder and turned it into a perennial Cup contender that won it all one year. The reasons for this year's performance have been documented extensively in this thread and others. Some of those reasons are Chiarelli's fault: the Seguin trade, Campbell's contract (but that alone isn't killing the team), the Boychuk trade (but there were really no workable alternatives), the NMC's/NTC's (but some of that was the cost of keeping some of the guys around).

However, quite a few others were not Chiarelli's fault: the injuries to key players (#1 center, #1 and #2 blue liners); the cap overage on the Iginla contract; Lucic's regression; Savard's LTIR hit; the overall cap squeeze due to the lockout that hurt the Bruins more than most teams. Bottom line is that in the salary cap era it is almost impossible to build a perennial contender. The Kings are likely to miss the playoffs this year. Chicago was 1st round fodder the 2 seasons between their 2 Cup victories. And for all the talk about Kessel and Seguin, neither of their teams are making the playoffs this year either.

Saying Chiarelli has a "poor eye for talent" is borderline ridiculous. This is the same guy that traded for 2 key pieces in 2011 (Kelly and Peverley, who did play big roles that year); signed Michael Ryder, traded for Nathan Horton, signed Iginla, traded for Seidenberg when he was in his prime; traded for Rask; traded for Soderberg. I think there's too much focus here on one trade that hasn't worked out well (Seguin). Ericksson is reasonably priced, but hasn't had the impact everyone thought he would have. And Smith's regression is troubling; who knows, perhaps there's a hidden injury somewhere that the team's keeping under wraps. But that one trade doesn't automatically turn Chiarelli into Mike O'Connell (who truly had a poor eye for talent).

I would argue that the NMC's/NTC's are not killing this team that much going forward. Bergeron and Rask are not going anywhere. Neither is Chara. Seidenberg's contract is a problem, but that goes beyond whatever NMC/NTC terms he has. Also, does anyone have any data to indicate that the Bruins are actually worse than other teams in terms of giving out these contracts to retain their core players?

If there is one issue that I would put at the feet of Chiarelli, it's the lean draft years. And he just revamped the scouting department, so at least he identified the problem and took steps to fix it (just like he replaced Dave Lewis with Claude Julien).

It's one bad season. That's reality in today's NHL. The team has some good players that many other teams would love to have, and a young and promising defenseman who should be able to step into the #1 role when Chara and Seidenberg retire. The cap crunch is temporary. The team really needs to hit in the draft; scoring another Marchand and/or Bergeron would be really good right now.

I still say the biggest issue facing Chiarelli this summer will be Lucic. If he does the wrong thing there, then he likely will be toast.

NHbeau · Mar 23, 2015

@kennycb- Randy Carlyle was a single name. You want to keep harping on it feel free. I listed one other "candidate" I'd be interested in and explained my thinking. Feel free to disagree. At least you've backed off the "Clode hater" stance. I've repeatedly made my case as to why it's either gut the team or move the coach a la Tito and you disagree. Cool. I get it.

Has Chiarelli hit on some moves? Sure. He's missed on plenty also and put the organization back years on them. The Iginla overage is 100% on him for the signing to begin with knowing the cap situation. The Boychuk trade he backed himself into a corner with thanks to NMC's on Kelly and others. I hate to break to everyone but this team isn't all that talented. Call it injuries, call it regression, call it bad luck or whatever. It's just not that talented. You have Rask, Bergeron, Hamilton and Krejci. After that it's all fungible guys or those on a steep decline commensurate to there pay. Fact is a 30g winger and a top 4 defensemen walked out the door because you over pay the Paille Campbell's and Kelly's of the world when you have kids who can do there job for relative peanuts. To add insult to injury you do the exact same thing with Smith and just piss away assets like Fraser. Compound the fact you have poor drafting which gives you zero chance of filling those roles internally and bam. You're fodder for the first round of the playoff's assuming you get lucky and make it. I don't see a "bad year", I see more coming. How many more and how bad are determined by what the front office does going forward. Wishcasting Lucic to be consistent and Chara to return to being "Chara" aren't real solid options.

Then again the thread isn't a discussion about Chiarelli or how well/poorly we think of him. It's about what we'd do if handed his job.

ivanvamp · Mar 23, 2015

Re: Lucic - What is a reasonable return the B's could get for him, and, given the cost savings involved and the potential return, would such a trade be the smart move?

veritas · Mar 23, 2015

NHbeau said:
@kennycb- Randy Carlyle was a single name. You want to keep harping on it feel free. I listed one other "candidate" I'd be interested in and explained my thinking. Feel free to disagree. At least you've backed off the "Clode hater" stance. I've repeatedly made my case as to why it's either gut the team or move the coach a la Tito and you disagree. Cool. I get it.

It deserves to be harped on, it was a really bad post. Carlisle is an awful, awful coach. Pretty universally disliked by media, fans, and hockey analytics people over the past few years. Then you floated it out there that it's clear the team doesn't listen to Julien anymore, with nothing to back it up. And then said you'd gut the scouting department, even though they did that last year and the early results are very promising. I could go on.

Edit: as for my response to the original question, the elephant in the room is Chara. He's still a very solid player, but he pretty quickly went from playing at a generational, hall of fame level, to just being very good. And that's a huge dropoff. I still would like to have him at his salary, but they still need to replace his value somehow. They don't have the depth or quality below him to replace all the high quality minutes he's provided over the years. I think Dougie can be that guy someday, but odds are almost nil that could happen next year. Trading Lucic opens up plenty of cap space to go after a top pair D-man. Byfuglien would be an intriguing trade target going into his last contract year.

RIFan · Mar 23, 2015

NHbeau said:
Fact is a 30g winger and a top 4 defensemen walked out the door because you over pay the Paille Campbell's and Kelly's of the world when you have kids who can do there job for relative peanuts. .

This is just a lazy post. There is absolutely nothing factual about that. If you think you can put a 30 goal scorer and top 4 Dman for their combined salaries less the "peanuts" the kids make show your work.

TFP · Mar 23, 2015

This is a great idea for a thread and I would really love it if we could try to keep it on track with the original premise. We've had the same Chiarelli/Claude arguments a million times, there's really no need to re-hash them here. If we want to do that for version 25, I'll absolutely spin up a new thread and move those posts over. I'm much more interested in people's actual solutions on what to do moving forward. I've been thinking about it a bit and haven't come up with a great plan yet, but I'll see if I can get something coherent together.

Thank you to those participating in the spirit of the thread.

kenneycb · Mar 23, 2015

I'm not sure why everybody wants to move Kelly. Yeah he probably shouldn't have an modified NTC latched to his contract (8 teams he can be traded to) but he's more or less an effective and versatile player that's signed at market value (Boyd Gordon seems like a relatively good comp) that also provides leadership in the locker room. As many have alluded to, I have a much greater problem with the fourth line taking up about $3m in cap space than I do with Chris Kelly taking up $3m in cap space.

Toe Nash · Mar 23, 2015

I have enough quibbles with Chia and Claude that I've posted in various threads, but the team is closer to the Presidents' trophy team than it is to a non-playoff team. Even this year all things considered they are still a solid enough possession team, and once you make the playoffs I'll take my chances when you have a top goalie like Rask.

I don't have a coherent "plan" but here are some major points that would guide my teambuilding:

1. Rask and Bergeron are your two best players. Bergeron makes his line one of the best in the league and really just does it all. Rask is a great goalie and while sometimes you can pull those guys out of nowhere, you don't want to be stuck without one. They don't go anywhere.

2. A big problem is Krejci's new contract. The more I look at that the more I think it's going to be an albatross. Over the past two years he's 60th among forwards in p/60 at even strength, and that's while Bergeron gets the toughest matchups, and while Krejci doesn't particularly push possession. I'm just not comfortable having that guy be my highest-paid player. I would deal him as soon as I could for cap relief and whatever young D-men I could grab. (I know he just signed it, but in this case I'm replacing Chia, so)

Moving that deal is also your best chance at getting something for clearing salary rather than just a dump deal for two second round picks (or worse).

3. After that, my next step is to talk to Dougie to try to buy out some of his RFA years before he gets even better and more expensive. Hopefully he says yes and you can lock him up at something reasonable.

4. I would extend Lucic if he took a (small) pay cut. No idea if he will.

5. I don't mind Claude too much (though it would be nice to have a coach who really understood analytics and maybe had his own forward-looking ideas like I dunno EVERY OTHER BOSTON SPORTS TEAM DOES). But his "grinder" fetish needs to go. I would do what I believe PSK suggested in another thread and just take the decision out of his hands by not keeping any "classic" 4th line guys on the roster. You want your 4th line to be different and built to win with speed? Then keep Bobby Robins in Providence and release Greg Campbell.

After that, the rest is just drafting and developing guys, which all things considered they have done fairly well at. I won't pretend to know any prospects they should target or veterans they should pick up on short-money deals. But if you're not right up against the cap those things become a lot easier...

FL4WL3SS · Mar 24, 2015

Toe Nash said:
I have enough quibbles with Chia and Claude that I've posted in various threads, but the team is closer to the Presidents' trophy team than it is to a non-playoff team. Even this year all things considered they are still a solid enough possession team, and once you make the playoffs I'll take my chances when you have a top goalie like Rask.

I don't have a coherent "plan" but here are some major points that would guide my teambuilding:

1. Rask and Bergeron are your two best players. Bergeron makes his line one of the best in the league and really just does it all. Rask is a great goalie and while sometimes you can pull those guys out of nowhere, you don't want to be stuck without one. They don't go anywhere.

2. A big problem is Krejci's new contract. The more I look at that the more I think it's going to be an albatross. Over the past two years he's 60th among forwards in p/60 at even strength, and that's while Bergeron gets the toughest matchups, and while Krejci doesn't particularly push possession. I'm just not comfortable having that guy be my highest-paid player. I would deal him as soon as I could for cap relief and whatever young D-men I could grab. (I know he just signed it, but in this case I'm replacing Chia, so)

Moving that deal is also your best chance at getting something for clearing salary rather than just a dump deal for two second round picks (or worse).

3. After that, my next step is to talk to Dougie to try to buy out some of his RFA years before he gets even better and more expensive. Hopefully he says yes and you can lock him up at something reasonable.

4. I would extend Lucic if he took a (small) pay cut. No idea if he will.

5. I don't mind Claude too much (though it would be nice to have a coach who really understood analytics and maybe had his own forward-looking ideas like I dunno EVERY OTHER BOSTON SPORTS TEAM DOES). But his "grinder" fetish needs to go. I would do what I believe PSK suggested in another thread and just take the decision out of his hands by not keeping any "classic" 4th line guys on the roster. You want your 4th line to be different and built to win with speed? Then keep Bobby Robins in Providence and release Greg Campbell.

After that, the rest is just drafting and developing guys, which all things considered they have done fairly well at. I won't pretend to know any prospects they should target or veterans they should pick up on short-money deals. But if you're not right up against the cap those things become a lot easier...

If you trade Krejci, who do you replace him with? Do you go into next season with Bergeron/Soderberg/Spooner?

What about Lucic's play makes youw ant to extend him?

I don't see the rationale behind those moves, but am all ears.

njexpress9 · Mar 24, 2015

Injuries to key players and horrible shootout results are the issues.

Apologies if this has been discussed but the injury to Krejci impacts the offense, defense and maybe the shootout.

Probably cherry picking but here goes... The offense and the Bruins with Krejci are half a goal per game better.

Goals         G         F/G    Rank   w Krejci    Rank    w/o Krejci    Rank
2011-12    260       3.17       2
2013-14    258       3.15       3
2014-15    190       2.60     19          2.92          6              2.28            26

I suck at tables.

McDrew · Mar 24, 2015

njexpress9 said:
Injuries to key players and horrible shootout results are the issues.

Apologies if this has been discussed but the injury to Krejci impacts the offense, defense and maybe the shootout.

Probably cherry picking but here goes... The offense and the Bruins with Krejci are half a goal per game better.

Goals         G         F/G    Rank   w Krejci    Rank    w/o Krejci    Rank
2011-12    260       3.17       2
2013-14    258       3.15       3
2014-15    190       2.60     19          2.92          6              2.28            26

I suck at tables.

You do suck at tables, but this is a really valid point. Krecji's absense at the top of this lineup has people playing out of their usual depth, and causes repercussions down the lineup.

TSC · Mar 24, 2015

After quite a bit of thinking, and research - here is my tentative plan.

The Remaining Games:
Even if the Bruins did make the playoffs - they don't have the horses this year to make any noise. So for the rest of the season I call up Khoko, Arnesson, and Morrow. See what the kids have. I'd have the lines look like this.

Marchand / Bergeron / Khoko
Lucic / Spooner / Pastrnak
Soderberg / Krejci / Loui
Talbot / Kelly / Ferlin

Chara / Morrow
Krug / McQuaid
Seidenberg / Bart
Arnesson (give him a couple of games to see how he does)

Campbell and Paille are gone at the end of the year anyways - and Smith could use some off ice time to figure out what's wrong with his game. You can sub Smith in to give one of the kids a game off here or there. But he's so wrapped up around the axle right now I'm not sure he's a better player than any of them at this point.

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
UFA's I'd let go.
McQuaid
Paille
Campbell
Bartkowski

UFA's I'd attempt to re-sign
Soderberg (no more than 2.5)

I Hate to See You Go, but I Love to Watch You Walk Away.
The two biggest issues I see on this team are lack of elite goal-scoring, and cap space being taken up by players who aren't worth what they're making. I would try to rectify this with a few trades.

Trade Proposal #1:
Milan Lucic
Malcolm Subban

for
Jordan Eberle

Edmonton has long coveted Lucic (if rumors are true). They also have no goalie after the 2015/16 season. This gives them some toughness they're lacking, and a legit blue chip goaltender prospect to build out from.

Trade Proposal #2: (Assuming the standings stay the same)
Dennis Seidenberg
Bruins first round pick

for
Dallas first round pick

Dallas is in need of another good, veteran defensemen. The cost to acquire him is the cap hit, and 3 positions in the draft. (I'll explain the Bruins reason for doing this in the draft section.)

Trade Proposal #3:
Reilly Smith

for
Zack Kassian

This trade I'm a little less sold on happening - but Kassian only has 1 year left. This could be a change of scenery trade for both teams.

Draft, or Draught?
With the Bruins 1st Pick in the 2015 NHL Draft.....

Ivan Provorov / D
Again - assuming the standings stay the same - I don't see him making it past FLA or COL. The Bruins move up to take this exceptional 2-Way D Man who has great offensive flair.

After that it's too great a crapshoot to really try and make picks. But this pick is one I'm sold on.

Free (Agents) as a Bird Now

Cody Franson D
I see Franson as a great Claude defensemen. I think he can be had on the relative cheap (4.25 million a year/2 years), he's still young (only 27), and I think he can learn from Chara. He's also going to be a transitional D while the young kids grow.

Always Remember to Wrap It Up

I keep Claude. With the team I'm developing I think he's the best option. But - I limit his ability to play guys that bring nothing to the team (Paille, Campbell) by getting rid of them. He's forced to roll with the team I'm building. This team is young, has scoring talent, and a D Core that will get better as it gains experience. You've got a team that can wait a year defensively while Provorov develops another year or two. It's not a team that will be a cup contender this year. But in 2016-2017 it could be there.

And that team for the 2015-2016 season looks like this.

Marchand/Bergeron/Eberle
Pastrnak/Spooner/Connolly
Soderberg/Krejci/Eriksson
Talbot/Kelly/Kassian

Chara/Hamilton
Franson/Krug
Arnesson / Morrow (Trotman, Warsofsky if Arnesson not ready)

Tuukka
Svedberg

FL4WL3SS · Mar 24, 2015

Ambitious.

I'm not sure the defense and depth would be strong enough to make up for the lack of top end talent, but it's interesting.

TSC · Mar 24, 2015

FL4WL3SS said:
Ambitious.

I'm not sure the defense and depth would be strong enough to make up for the lack of top end talent, but it's interesting.

As I said - I don't think this is a team that will compete immediately. But I disagree with your assessment that roster doesn't have top end talent. Bergeron, Krejci and Eberle are already there. Pastrnak, Connolly, Hamilton, Arnesson and Spooner all have a great chance of getting there. Provorov is also a potential #1 D.

McDrew · Mar 24, 2015

Great post, one minor quip, in that Miller has a 1 way deal next year as well (replacing the 3rd pairing ???) in your spec probably. Certainly a lot to consider and definitely better than my contributions to this thread so far

FL4WL3SS · Mar 24, 2015

TheShynessClinic said:
As I said - I don't think this is a team that will compete immediately. But I disagree with your assessment that roster doesn't have top end talent. Bergeron, Krejci and Eberle are already there. Pastrnak, Connolly, Hamilton, Arnesson and Spooner all have a great chance of getting there. Provorov is also a potential #1 D.

I should have swapped out talent for experience.

cshea · Mar 24, 2015

Here's a fun article about how bad Seidenberg has been this year. The author's conclusion is that the Bruins need to either buy him out or Mike Richards him and send him to Providence. Thought I'd share it in here since doing something with him is part of the the plan for the future.

https://businessofhockey.wordpress.com/2015/03/23/much-of-the-bruins-struggles-can-be-blamed-on-veteran-defenseman-seidenberg/

My god.

The Napkin · Mar 24, 2015

He's been not good but didn't we pretty much know that was going to be the case? I thought I remember reading somewhere that while it was good enough to play on it takes up to a full year for that kind of injury to fully heal and get back to where he was. So I guess my hope is that it's not age it's that he just has never really been totally healthy and it'll be better next year.
Which is another part of the reason I'm so meh about this year and am willing to write it off as a lost year.

McDrew · Mar 24, 2015

From the article: "Seidenberg is on pace to play over 1500 five-on-five minutes this season which is the most for a Bruins defenseman since Chara’s 1490 minutes in 2010-2011. His play this season hasn’t nearly been good enough as a top paring defenseman on a team fighting for a playoff position."
So Seidenberg is coming off a horrible injury. Injuries to other players have made him play way more minutes that he would be expected to for any reason, let alone due to his injury. When his ability/health dictates that he should be playing against lines that aren't the other team's obvious #1, he's been forced to play them because he was the de-facto #1 when Chara was gone.

I'm trying to figure out where to find this information, and I'm not nearly rich enough to call up Elias and ask them:
How have teams historically fared when the following two conditions happened:
1) The team's leading D-Man (by minutes per game) from the prior year goes down for 20+ games due to injury
2) The team's leading scorer from the prior year goes down for 30+ games
3) (optional) the two of those things happen concurrently or overlapped

I don't know if we'll get a sample size that significant, or any sample size at all other than this year, but I'd really like to see how teams fared after losing those players, in the year that they lost them, and then what happened the next season. Basically: is the level the bruins have fallen usual for a team that has lost two players of that importance, and is there any indication from historical data whether the performance depression is temporary or longer-lasting

lexrageorge · Mar 24, 2015

cshea said:
Here's a fun article about how bad Seidenberg has been this year. The author's conclusion is that the Bruins need to either buy him out or Mike Richards him and send him to Providence. Thought I'd share it in here since doing something with him is part of the the plan for the future.

https://businessofhockey.wordpress.com/2015/03/23/much-of-the-bruins-struggles-can-be-blamed-on-veteran-defenseman-seidenberg/

My god.

The only issue I have is that it's not uncommon for players to say it took them 12-18 months to truly come back from a serious knee injury such as Seidenberg's. Recall that September Gronk was nowhere near January Gronk. So, while i understand the points raised in the article, unless there's a chance to offload him and his salary, I don't see him being a buyout candidate or being sent to Providence.

It's Your Team

not AWOL

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play

not AWOL

Well-Known Member

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour

Member

Member

captain obvious

Member

Member

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer

Member

Throw Momma From the Train

Member

Throw Momma From the Train

Member

Member

Throw Momma From the Train

Member

Angry Pissbum

Member

Member

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss

Member

Angry Pissbum

Member

hates latinos/bay staters

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play

hates latinos/bay staters

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play

Member

hates latinos/bay staters

captain obvious

Member

Member

Moderator

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play

Member

Member

New Member

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer

Member

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss

Member

Member

wise ass al kaprielian

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss

Member